On 5/30/16 7:52 PM, Seb wrote:
On Monday, 30 May 2016 at 21:39:14 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
On Monday, 30 May 2016 at 16:34:49 UTC, Jack Stouffer wrote:
On Monday, 30 May 2016 at 16:25:20 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
D1 -> D2 was a vastly more disruptive change than getting rid of
auto-decoding would be.
Don't be so sure. All string handling code would become broken, even
if it appears to work at first.
Assuming silent breakage is on the table, what would be broken, really?
Code that must intentionally count or otherwise operate code points,
sure. But how much of all string handling code is like that?
Perhaps it would be worth trying to silently remove autodecoding and
seeing how much of Phobos breaks, as an experiment. Has this been
tried before?
(Not saying this is a route we should take, but it doesn't seem to me
that it will break "all string handling code" either.)
132 lines in Phobos use auto-decoding - that should be fixable ;-)
See them: http://sprunge.us/hUCL
More details: https://github.com/dlang/phobos/pull/4384
Thanks for this investigation! Results are about as I'd have speculated.
-- Andrei
